Legal Opinion

Nakuaimanu v. Halstead

Hawaii Supreme Court

Decided November 17, 1877PublishedCited by 5 opinions

ON QUESTIONS RESERVED. The Statute of LIMITATIONS does not run against a tenant in common unless there has been an ouster or its equivalent. A lease made by a tenant in- common for a specific portion of the land, no partition having been had, is not good against the other tenant in common.

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion of the Court by

Judd, J.

This- is an action of ejectment. The complainant alleges *43that defendants have taken possession of “the most northern third ” of the land described in Royal Patent No. 262, granted to Kupahu, the plaintiff’s ancestor.

The jury, under the direction of the Court, rendered a verdict for the plaintiff subject to the following questions reserved:

“ Whether the Statute ©f Limitations will run against a person claiming to be a tenant in common of the land with the plaintiff', both claiming through the same ancestor?
“Judgment on the verdict to be modified if the Court…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Barnitz's Lessee v. CaseySupreme Court of the United States · 1813
  2. Johnson v. GivensCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1860

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. McAulton v. SmartHawaii Supreme Court · 1973
  2. Redfearn v. KuhiaHawaii Supreme Court · 1972
  3. Makainai v. LalakeaHawaii Supreme Court · 1918
  4. Hawaiian Commercial & Sugar Co. v. Waikapu Sugar Co.Hawaii Supreme Court · 1893
  5. Kaioipahia v. KunaHawaii Supreme Court · 1897

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API